Loading skill
Install any skill in seconds. Free to start, no credit card required.
Get Started Free →runtsang/stage1-icml-breakdown
Break down full ICML reviewer responses into structured rebuttal units.
Passed 13 of 24 test cases with the skill, and 14 of 24 without it.
1 fixed12 passed either way9 still failing2 broke
Tokens, turns and time describe resource use, not a dollar price.
A test case the skill fixed. Same model, same prompt, with and without the skill.
An ICML reviewer wrote under 'Strengths And Weaknesses': 'The paper presents an elegant mathematical framework (Strength 1). However, empirical evaluation is limited to synthetic datasets and lacks baseline comparisons (Weakness 1).' How should this section be parsed into atomic issues and context?
| Checked | Without skill | With skill |
|---|---|---|
| Extracts criticisms regarding synthetic datasets into atomic weakness issues. | Passed | Passed |
| Keeps praise regarding the mathematical framework in context. | Missed | Passed |
The instructions your model reads when the skill loads.
Apply the shared template first:
skills/stage1/template/SKILL.mdThen apply only the ICML-specific overrides below.
Extract exactly these six keys (numbers only):
rating <- Overall Recommendationconfidence <- Confidencesoundness <- Soundnesspresentation <- Presentationsignificance <- Significanceoriginality <- Originalitysummary <- Summarystrength <- Limitations (keep compatibility with shared output key naming)Strengths And Weaknesses (extract only concern/criticism parts)Key Questions For Authors# Stage1 ICML Breakdown## Scores must contain exactly the six keys above.If "Strengths And Weaknesses" mixes praise and criticism in one bullet, keep praise in preserved context and split only actionable weakness concerns into atomic issues.
test cases passed, vs 14 / 24 without
Published skills whose descriptions closely match this one, with their headline benchmark lift.
More skills from the same source and nearby in the registry, with their headline benchmark lift.